Efficacy and safety of figure-of-eight suture versus manual pressure for venous access closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Vascular hemostasis after venous access in cardiovascular procedures remains a challenge. Figure-of-eight (FoE) emerged as an alternative technique to manual pressure. However, its feasibility and safety is unknown. Methods A comprehensive search in , PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO Services, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and various scientific conference sessions from inception to December 1, 2018, was performed. A meta-analysis was performed using random effects model to calculate risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Seven studies were eligible and included 1978 patients, of whom 982 patients received the FoE suture, while 996 received manual pressure. There was no difference in the risk of access site pseudoaneurysm (RR 0.48, 95%CI 0.13 to 1.73, p = 0.26) and fistula (RR 0.90, 95%CI 0.22 to 3.75, p = 0.89) between the two techniques. Compared with manual pressure, FoE was associated with lower risk of access site complications (RR 0.37, 95%CI 0.24 to 0.58, 0.65, p < 0.0001) including bleeding (RR 0.30, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.50, p < 0.00001) and hematoma (RR 0.41, 95%CI 0.25 to 0.68, 0.83, p = 0.0005). Time to hemostasis was significantly lower in FoE group compared with manual pressure (MD - 21.04 min, 95%CI - 35.66 to - 6.42, p = 0.005). Conclusions The results of our meta-analysis showed that there was no difference in the risk of access site pseudoaneurysm and fistula between FoE and manual pressure. FoE was associated with lower risk of access site hematoma and bleeding compared with manual pressure. Our results reiterate the safety and feasibility of FoE suture for venous access closure.